FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-17-2008, 08:34 AM
Michal 'vorner' Vaner
 
Default Ati or Nvida

Hello

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:42:22PM +0430, Platoali wrote:
> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
> regardless of how much open/free the drivers is. I'm currently
> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
> anyone have any comment about them?

I had an nvidia some time ago (2 years). I had to give up 3D, since the
proprietary drivers gave me hell. Only about every third version worked
(only with every second kernel version). Even when it worked, it
sometimes crashed the whole kernel or didn't render fonts.

Now I have intel i915 and I'm happy. It is not a strong card, but it
supports 3D, I'm able to even play games on it, it allows plugging in
monitors at runtime (with X capable of resizing the screen & pretending
it is xinerama).

I have no experience with ati.

--
Anyone who goes to a psychiatrist ought to have his head examined.
-- Samuel Goldwyn

Michal 'vorner' Vaner
 
Old 06-17-2008, 10:59 AM
James
 
Default Ati or Nvida

Platoali <platoali <at> gmail.com> writes:


> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?


All religious questions, imho. Nvidia might have the latest edge in
pure performance, but, the movement to open up sources is definitely
an opportunity for a game changing situation, imho.



> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
> regardless of how much open/free the drivers is. I'm currently
> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
> anyone have any comment about them?

kernel newbies has some information for you to start your research:
Section 3 DRIVERS:
Section 3.1 Graphics:
http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges

http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges#head-d08660c208028aa2b3783826cd7935ab510b736f


You might also use this page for comparison purposes:

http://freestone-group.com/video-card-stability-test/benchmark-results.html

Personally, I like ATI, but it more because I believe that
AMD will come closer to doing what's best for opensource
rather than Nvidia or Intel. It would be great if I'm wrong....

When you spend your money, you are "casting a vote", imho.


hth,

James

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 06-17-2008, 01:13 PM
Hal Martin
 
Default Ati or Nvida

James wrote:

Platoali <platoali <at> gmail.com> writes:




I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?

Just a suggestion, wait about a month before you buy, if you can. Both
ATi and nVidia are poised to release new generations of cards, both
which outperform their predecessors at a lower price point.
All religious questions, imho. Nvidia might have the latest edge in
pure performance, but, the movement to open up sources is definitely

an opportunity for a game changing situation, imho.

nVidia user here, I haven't had any problems with their drivers. Sure,
there's the occasional version with a memory leak, etc... and when that
happens I just downgrade to the last stable version and wait for a
better one to come out.





And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
regardless of how much open/free the drivers is. I'm currently
thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
anyone have any comment about them?

Again, I haven't had any difficulties with the nVidia drivers. I'm
running a GeForce 7900GTX, which uses the same linux driver as the
Quadro does.

kernel newbies has some information for you to start your research:
Section 3 DRIVERS:
Section 3.1 Graphics:
http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges

http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges#head-d08660c208028aa2b3783826cd7935ab510b736f


You might also use this page for comparison purposes:

http://freestone-group.com/video-card-stability-test/benchmark-results.html

Personally, I like ATI, but it more because I believe that
AMD will come closer to doing what's best for opensource
rather than Nvidia or Intel. It would be great if I'm wrong....

When you spend your money, you are "casting a vote", imho.


hth,

James




-Hal
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 06-17-2008, 01:28 PM
Galevsky
 
Default Ati or Nvida

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Hal Martin <hal.martin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Again, I haven't had any difficulties with the nVidia drivers. I'm running a
> GeForce 7900GTX, which uses the same linux driver as the Quadro does.

Same here with nvidia driver on a 8800GTS GC.

A former ATI addict who left for performance issues.

Gal'
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 06-17-2008, 01:59 PM
Jesús Guerrero
 
Default Ati or Nvida

Hello,

I can only comment about my experience (facts).
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:42:22 +0430
Platoali <platoali@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, last night the graphic card of my laptop got broken. So I'm
> considering to replace it with a workstation for some graphic
> applications (Mainly blender and gimp.) I need 3d acceleration, and my
> poor laptop was rendering for hours to get my job done. So I decide to
> buy a workstation instead a laptop. I want to ask, which graphic cards
> are better supported in Linux. I know that ATI have freed or in the
> process of freeing their graphic cards driver.

No, they just released some specs. They did not release a single line of the
fglrx driver source.

> But I did not have any
> good memory from my previous experience with ATI. My previous card was
> ATI radeon 9600m and it never worked the way it had to until broken.
> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?
>
I tried it yet-once-more a couple of months ago, it did not work, just like the
few dozens I've tried before. Particularly I found:

1.- 100% cpu usage under any wm, while idle
2.- xinerama just plainly doesn't work, it's not usable, and provoqued xorg
log spamming due to a bug

This was with an hd2600.

> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
> regardless of how much open/free the drivers is. I'm currently
> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
> anyone have any comment about them?

I never found a nvidia card with did not work with a simple
"emerge nvidia-drivers". They just work.

In any case, luck with anything you choose.
--
Jesús Guerrero <i92guboj@terra.es>
 
Old 06-17-2008, 02:20 PM
Justin
 
Default Ati or Nvida

Galevsky schrieb:

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Hal Martin <hal.martin@gmail.com> wrote:


Again, I haven't had any difficulties with the nVidia drivers. I'm running a
GeForce 7900GTX, which uses the same linux driver as the Quadro does.



Same here with nvidia driver on a 8800GTS GC.

A former ATI addict who left for performance issues.

Gal'


Second!
 
Old 06-17-2008, 02:24 PM
Justin
 
Default Ati or Nvida

Platoali schrieb:

Well, last night the graphic card of my laptop got broken. So I'm
considering to replace it with a workstation for some graphic
applications (Mainly blender and gimp.) I need 3d acceleration, and my
poor laptop was rendering for hours to get my job done. So I decide to
buy a workstation instead a laptop. I want to ask, which graphic cards
are better supported in Linux. I know that ATI have freed or in the
process of freeing their graphic cards driver. But I did not have any
good memory from my previous experience with ATI. My previous card was
ATI radeon 9600m and it never worked the way it had to until broken.
I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?

And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
regardless of how much open/free the drivers is. I'm currently
thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
anyone have any comment about them?

Best regards
Platoali


Quoting Donnie from his interview with LinuxCrazy:

[0:04:38]
comprookie2000: What video card do you recommend?

dberkholz: I like ATI or Intel, depending on your needs. Both of them
have done a really good job of opening up all their documentation and
their drivers in the past couple of years, more recently ATI: Intel's
been doing it for a while and set the standard. If you're a gamer, you
probably want ATI instead of Intel because the Intel ones don't perform
as well, but they're really nice and cheap and open. Some NVidia cards
work with a reverse-engineered driver called Nouveau
<http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/>, but I don't really want to support a
company that doesn't support open source.


comprookie2000: Yeah, I was on newegg.com <http://hewegg.com> and they
interviewed a person from NVidia and they said they weren't going to
open up the drivers, that's what the guy said on the interview. Tell me
about your everyday box.



Full transcript here:
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?p=5099210#5099210

Podcast here: http://linuxcrazy.com/?q=node/33
 
Old 06-17-2008, 02:53 PM
Grant Edwards
 
Default Ati or Nvida

On 2008-06-17, Platoali <platoali@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, last night the graphic card of my laptop got broken. So I'm
> considering to replace it with a workstation for some graphic
> applications (Mainly blender and gimp.) I need 3d acceleration, and my
> poor laptop was rendering for hours to get my job done. So I decide to
> buy a workstation instead a laptop. I want to ask, which graphic cards
> are better supported in Linux. I know that ATI have freed or in the
> process of freeing their graphic cards driver. But I did not have any
> good memory from my previous experience with ATI. My previous card was
> ATI radeon 9600m and it never worked the way it had to until broken.
> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?
>
> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux
> kernel regardless of how much open/free the drivers is.

Definitely nVidia. Over the past few years I've had a 3-4 of
each (ATI and nVidia).

I've had continuous problems with ATI (on all 3 different
boards/chipsets). DRI works sort-of, some of the time. The
free drivers lock up, the closed-source drivers work a little
better have have bugs even in 2D mode. The video overlay never
worked on one of my ATI board (the one that used to be in my
HTPC setup).

All the nVidia cards "just work". The open 2D drivers "just
work". The closed 3D drivers "just work".

> I'm currently thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati
> firegl 5600. Does anyone have any comment about them?

I run a dual-DVI Quadro something-or-other and never had a
single problem. Just did an emerge nvidia-drivers, and
everything (including DRI) worked. Same for a dual-head nVidia
6200 setup.

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I'll show you MY
at telex number if you show me
visi.com YOURS ...

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 06-17-2008, 04:18 PM
"Hemmann, Volker Armin"
 
Default Ati or Nvida

Hi,

if you want to make a political statement: buy ATI

if you want to use the card with almost no problems and good performance: buy
nvidia.

Yes, ATI has released docu. Yes, everybody is working on the drivers. But the
open ones only do 2d so far and the closed ones are horrible.

There are problem threads on nvnews. But its a support forum.... most people
using nvidia don't have any problems.
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 06-17-2008, 04:40 PM
Platoali
 
Default Ati or Nvida

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Hemmann, Volker Armin
<volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> if you want to make a political statement: buy ATI
>
> if you want to use the card with almost no problems and good performance: buy
> nvidia.
>
> Yes, ATI has released docu. Yes, everybody is working on the drivers. But the
> open ones only do 2d so far and the closed ones are horrible.
>

Does this mean that AMD have not released 3d parts of the drivers? Do
they plan to release the 3d parts?


> There are problem threads on nvnews. But its a support forum.... most people
> using nvidia don't have any problems.


Well, I've search a little bit, and found that Ati firegl 5600 beats
Quadro fx 1700 in every way. according to this:

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/graphics-cards/specapc-3ds-max-9-graphics,117.html

Although all tests have been run on windows. It seems that Ati have
better hardware and it is also going to be more open source friendly
in near future. I'm planning to use this workstation for 3 or 4 years
or even more. So I'm thinking to risk a little and bet on AMD , and
hope that they deserve my hard earned money. but I'm not sure yet. I
need to do a little more search about AMD plans, and current
development status of ATI driver.
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 02:25 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org